The Body In Practice

When making a comparison between the complexities of the human body and interior spaces, there are many alternate aspects that exhibit this correlation. This blog will outline a few examples and break down the different comparable aspects.

The body and Cultural Influence:

Surpassing the general concept of the body being the wholeness of one's being and thinking more deeply, the body can be its own form of art. The body contains the substrate of the mind and is more than just the shell of a person as it harnesses the power of cognitive function, and symbolically, the power to inform cultural identities

The body is the basis for creation of meaning and culture through self expression, which has led to what is now known as cultural influence. The concept is entirely circular as it gathers inspiration from people and, in turn, influences others. Cultural influences such as the adaptation of our bodies, including tattoos, piercings and body modifications are a great example of establishing a connection between body and art. Our ability to move in certain ways and articulate our bodies to emulate particular shapes shows how The body can be seen as a malleable form of art

Change and adaptation:

Linking in with the human ability to alter one’s appearance, the body can also change in subconscious ways that show a direct connection to interior space. In parallel to Frank Duffy’s concept of shearing layers within a building, the human body does not stay the same forever. It adapts, changes and turns into something new, fit for new purposes. A great example is our pupils expanding or shrinking to comfortably intake particular lighting, and similarly to this, interior spaces adapt with the ever-changing human need; providing new purposes for pre-existing spaces. The brain is active within the construction of perception, for example, the eye is not responsible for creating the images we see and the ears are not responsible for creating the sounds we hear- instead they are merely communicative. It is instead the brain that is responsible for translating this information and creating relative perceptions. Analogously, it is proposed by Eiler Rasmussen within his book ‘Experiencing Architecture’ that an interior space is only really created when a user engages with it; for it is only useful when being perceived by people; supported by his point ‘To experience architecture is to experience life’.

Power and Hierarchy:

The connection between the body and physical interior space can be linked through hierarchy of power and can be dated back to the prehistoric ages and paleolithic period. Power has always been depicted in large groups of people, occupying more space and that is translated today as people who take up more physical space, tend to hold more power and status. Large framework dresses with a large circumference were a status symbol in the Victorian era, nowadays a large social presence, with a large following of many other people can project the same image. This idea that inhabiting more physical space correlates to one's power can be seen as a driving force for the blatant power divide between the male and female population. The human body is the object of domination and authority; as men tend to be physically larger this manifests in power and oppression.

References:

Duffy. F, (1992), ‘Shearing Layers’

Brand. S, (1994), ‘How Buildings Learn: What Happens After They’re Built?’, Viking

Rassmussen. E, (1959), ‘Experiencing Architecture’,  The Mit Press